Talk:Terry Pratchett/GA1

GA Reassessment
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Well written, conforms sufficiently with MoS. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * I repaired some reference links using WP:CHECKLINKS. Ref #78 appears to be a dead link. I have commented it out as I cannot find a replacement source. All other references check out. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, I am more than happy to confirm the status of this as a WP:Good article. I believe this could be taken to WP:FAC.  There may be some quibbles about some of the sources, but they are sufficient for GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, I am more than happy to confirm the status of this as a WP:Good article. I believe this could be taken to WP:FAC.  There may be some quibbles about some of the sources, but they are sufficient for GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I am more than happy to confirm the status of this as a WP:Good article. I believe this could be taken to WP:FAC.  There may be some quibbles about some of the sources, but they are sufficient for GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)